Agricultural Reviews

  • Chief EditorPradeep K. Sharma

  • Print ISSN 0253-1496

  • Online ISSN 0976-0741

  • NAAS Rating 4.84

Frequency :
Quarterly (March, June, September & December)
Indexing Services :
AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Agricultural Reviews, volume 41 issue 2 (june 2020) : 175-178

Detopping in Maize: A Review

S. Rajkumara, Vinita, R.M. Kachapur, B.G. Shivakumar
1Department of Agronomy, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad-580 005, Karnataka, India. 
Cite article:- Rajkumara S., Vinita, Kachapur R.M., Shivakumar B.G. (2020). Detopping in Maize: A Review. Agricultural Reviews. 41(2): 175-178. doi: 10.18805/ag.R-1953.
The scope of increasing the cultivated area under forages is rather limited, because of mounting pressure on need for food and commercial crops, but there is a large demand for green and dry fodder from livestock industry. Hence, fodder production has to be increased per unit area per unit time. By practicing the de-topping in commercial grain maize we can increase the fodder production, quality and it also reduces the deficit of fodder to some extent. Reviews indicated that by de-topping of maize, there may be slight reduction in grain yield of maize but by doing it at right stage/time and at right plant height it gives highest net returns than no de-topped treatments. De-topping at 30 days after silking; removing the top 6 leaves or after physiological maturity; removing all the leaves above the cob or de-topping above 10th internode gives highest fodder yield and net returns with slight or no reduction in grain yield. 
  1. Afrarinesh, A. (2005). Study the effect of the intensity and timing of topping on maize (Zea mays L.) grain yield under Khuzestan condition. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 114: 93-99
  2. Ahmed, F. Saha, R.R. Jahanl M.A. and Khan, M.S.A. (2007). Grain and fodder yield from the same hybrid maize as influenced by source-sink manipulation. Journal of Bangladesh Agricultural University. 5(2): 177-180.
  3. Amulya, C.C. (2018). Effect of detopping on growth and yield of maize (Zea mays L.), M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bengaluru.
  4. Barimavandi, A.R., Sedaghathoor, S and Ansari, R. (2010). Effects of different defoliation treatments on yield and yield components in maize (Zea mays L.) cultivar of S.C.704. Australian Journal of Crop Science. 4(1): 9-1.
  5. Bhargavi, M.B. (2017). De-topping influence on productivity of rabi maize (Zea mays L.). M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis, Professor Jayshankar Telangana State Agricultural University, Telangana.
  6. Borras, L and Otegui, M. E. (2001). Maize kernel weight response to post flowering source- sink ratio. Crop Science. 21: 1816-1822.
  7. Brar, A.S., Anupam Singh and Thakur Singh (2000). Response of hybrid cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) to nitrogen and canopy modification practices. Indian Journal of Agronomy. 45(2): 395-400.
  8. Chaudhary, D.P. Ashwani Kumar, Sapna Mandhania, S. Srivastava P. and Kumar R. S. (2012). Maize As Fodder - An alternative approach, Directorate of Maize Research, Pusa Campus, New Delhi - 110 012, Technical Bulletin 2012/04 pp. 32.
  9. Duncan, W.C, Williams, W.A. and Loomis, R.S. (1967). Tassels and the productivity of maize. Crop Science. 7: 37-39.
  10. Dwyer, L.M and Stewart, D.W. (1986). Leaf area development in field-grown maize. Agronomy Journal 78: 334-343.
  11. Emam, Y. and Taddayon, M. R. (1999). Effects of plant density and detopping on grain yield and yield components of maize at Doroodzan area of Fars Province [Persian]. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Science, 30(4): 743-750.
  12. Emam, Y. Sedaghat, M. and Baharani, H. (2013). Responses of Maize (SC704) Yield and Yield Components to Source Restriction. Iran Agricultural Research. 32(1): 31-39.
  13. Emran, S.A., Haque, K.M.S., Khaliq, Q.A and Miah, M.Y. (2014). Source-sink manipulation and population density effects on fodder and grain yield of hybrid maize. Bangladesh Agronomy Journal. 17(1): 59-66.
  14. Esechie, H.A and Al-Alawi, K. (2002). Effect of tassel removal on grain yield of maize (Zea mays L.) under saline conditions. Crop Research. 24: 96-101.
  15. Gaurkar, S.G. and Bharad, G.M. (1998). Effect of plant population, detopping and nitrogen levels on growth and yield of maize (Zea mays L.). PKV Research Journal. 22: 136-137.
  16. Gupta, B.K., B.L. Bhardwaj and A.K. Ahuja. (2004). Nutritional value of forage crops of Punjab. Punjab Agricultural University Publication.
  17. Hanway, J. J. (1969). Defoliation effects on different corn (Zea mays L.) hybrids as influenced by plant population and stage of development. Agronomy Journal. 61: 534- 538.
  18. Keating, B. A. and Wafula, B. M. (1992). Modeling the fully expanded area of maize leaves. Field Crop Research. 29:163-176.
  19. Mishra, S. and Kler, D.S. (2003). Defoliation/Detasseling studies in maize – A review. In Dimensions of Environmental Threat Edited by Arvind Kumar, Daya Publishing House Delhi.
  20. Muleba, N. (1980). Physiological determinants of grain yield of maize (Zea mays L.) varieties in different environments. Ph.D thesis, Kansas State University, USA.
  21. Paterniani, E. (1981). Influence of tassel size on ear placement in maize. Maydica 26: 85-89.
  22. Rathika, S. (2013). Effect of crop geometry, intercropping and topping practices on yield, nutrient uptake and soil fertility status of baby corn (Zea mays L.). International Journal of Agricultural Science. 9(2): 583-587.
  23. Rathika, S. (2014). Influence of crop geometry, intercropping and topping practices on green cob yield and fodder quality of baby corn (Zea mays L.). International Journal of Agricultural Science, 10(1): 182-185.
  24. Roy, S.K. and Biswas, P.K. (1992). Effect of plant density and de- topping following silking on cob growth, fodder and grain yield of maize (Zea mays). Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 119: 297-301.
  25. Saha, R.R., Rahman, M.S. and Golder, P.C. (2001). Maize-legume intercropping and effect of detopping of maize after silking. Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Research. 26(3): 445-451.
  26. Shivakumar, B.G. (2018). Evaluation of fodder value of maize varieties as influenced by nitrogen levels and de-topping before physiological maturity. IGFRI Report, Regional Station, IGFRI Dharwad
  27. Srisailam, G. (2010). Effect of de-topping on dry matter production and grain yield in maize (Zea mays L.) during rabi. M.Sc. (Ag.), Thesis, Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University Andhra Pradesh.
  28. Subedi, K.D. (1996). Effect of leaf stripping, de-tasseling and topping of maize on the yield of maize and relay intercropped finger millet. Experimental Agriculture. 32: 57-61.
  29. Teyker, R.H., Moll, R.H. and Jackson, W.A. (1991). Differences among prolific maize hybrids in the effects of lower leaf removal. Maydica. 36(1): 1-10.
  30. Tilahun, A. (1993). Quantitative and physiological traits in maize (Zea mays). Associate with different levels of moisture, plant density and leaf defoliation in Ethiopia In: Proceedings of the First National Maize Workshop of Ethiopia. [Benti, T. and Ransom, J.K. (Eds.)], IAR/CIMMYT, Addis Ababa. 74-80.
  31. Umashankara, K.B. (2007). Influence of stages and levels of defoliation on seed yield and quality of fodder maize (cv. South African Tall). M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis. University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. 77p.
  32. Walpole, P.R and Morgan, D.G. (1970). A quantitative study of grain filling in (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivar Maris widgeon. Annals of Botany, 34: 308-309.
  33. Westgate, M.E and Boyer, J.S. (1985). Carbohydrates and reproduction development at low leaf water potential in maize. Crop Science. 25:762-769.

Editorial Board

View all (0)